Jump to content

Warren Peace

Members
  • Posts

    205
  • Joined

  • Last visited

    Never

Posts posted by Warren Peace

  1. I'd really like to be able to move a column of vehicles down a twisty road without having to plot paths for every single one. THis came up in CMBO and I am kind of surprised there is no way to do this in CMBB.

    Two possiblities. Make a new "follow" command for vehicles on Roads or have a special "road move" command, so I can click anywhere on a road and the vehicle will only move on the road to get to that point.

    Warren

  2. I've played it about a half-dozen times (default setting) and the best I could get was a draw. There is just too much Russian firepower!

    I have won against the AI placement, as it does weird things with the minefields and the bunker. In one game it placed the bunker directly against a buiding, so the only line of fire was into the building! (I hope they fix this in the patch).

    Warren

  3. I just got the game and am playing the 1939 campaign as the axis. I'm at March 1941 and have yet to get a single research advance, even though I have 1750 invested in research currently, and have had had over 1000 points (4 research points) for over a year. In the demo I always got at least one or two advances by now.

    What bothers me is on my turn summary screen it always says "research unavailable".

  4. I use virtual PC 5 to run some PC games. Lately I have been playing strategic command demo and SM Gettysburg! Both of these games play extremely well. I have not played Panzer Elite, so I can't comment on this game specifically.

    I have been using VPC5 on my Pismo 400MHz G3 with 320Mb RAM. I should mention that VPC runs much faster under system 9 than system 10. I would think that your iMac at 800Mhz will work very nicely.

    Warren

    PS I use windows 95B as my OS.

    [ July 09, 2002, 10:59 AM: Message edited by: Warren Peace ]

  5. I kind of see this release date thing as an anolagy to hurricaine warnings. As the hurricaine approaches the landfall prediction becomes more and more refined. In the case of CMBB, the initial prediction was this summer and now summer is here. You would think that a new "window" is now known.

    Why won't they tell us what the new prediction is? Perhaps the storm has stalled out at sea smile.gif

  6. Since I am a Mac-user who will be playing SC on virtual PC, I was wondering about copy-protection. Certain copy protection software really sucks using VPC. SPecifically the copy protection for TOAW-WOTY was a real pain. It must have spun the CD for over a minute before the damn game would open.

    I think the copy protection was Safe-disk 2.

    Warren

  7. How does everyone feel about the "Instant Builds" feature? Personally I'm having fun, but it does not seem very realistic. Is their a hidden rationale that I am missing? I'd like to hear from both the designer and players.

    Warren

  8. Personally I don't think the subs are modeled correctly, but I also don't think it breaks the game. My suggestion would be to make subs tougher to spot and/or kill, but I would also drastically reduce thier effectiveness against surface fleets. In reality very few Naval vessels were killed by subs. They were far too fast and it was very difficult to get subs into position. Subs in the Atlantic were primarily used for killing merchant vessels, which in game terms should be MPP loss.

    THerefore, Subs should be hard to spot, hard to kill (i.e. fewer losses per combat), but much less effective in attacking capital ships.

    That being said, I really like the beta and will be happy to send you the $25 now just to help with the beta testing!

    Warren

    [ May 28, 2002, 04:20 PM: Message edited by: Warren Peace ]

  9. As the British I decided to invade Ireland to get a few extra MPPs. After taking Dublin I realized that there was no way to get my troops off the island! I ended up disbanding one of the armies and used the corps to garrison Dublin.

    Seems like there should be a way to get the troops home.

    [ May 27, 2002, 10:57 PM: Message edited by: Warren Peace ]

  10. I just downloaded the demo and tryed in out on Virtual PC 3.0. Other then a long lag in the initial loading, the game played well with no real long delays. Sound worked well too.

  11. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> The previous

    fellow's calculations are misleading though, because roughly half of the casualties involved in the "200% turnover" figure for

    infantry divisions, were non-battle losses (frostbite, trenchfoot, dysentery, pneumonia and traffic accidents mostly). <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    Actual my calculations appear to be an underestimate. Last night I looked at Omar Bradley's book and he claims that 83% of ALL casualties (battle and non-battle) occured in the 80 rifle platoons that make up a division. Thus my math actually underestimates the loss rates for Infantryman by a factor of two. Interestingly, it would also suggest that the prototypical Machine gunner in question (if he was a .30 or .50 man, would have a longer "life" expectancy since he was not actually part of the Rifle Platoon that General Bradley refers to. Of course if he were a BAR man, then he'd be toast. This kinda makes sense because in US doctrine heavy machine guns were basically support weapons and would be supporting from a distance.

  12. My step-father lasted from July 25 to November 25 in the 5th Armored Division as a medic.

    My impression is that on Average US Infantry divisions suffered around 200% casualties from D-Day to VE day. Since 75% of the casualties were suffered in the 7200 individuals that made up the infantry companies. They would be turned over faster. If we do the math:

    Assume 14,000 men per Division, therefore 200% casualties would be 28,000 casualties. 75% would fall in the combat battalians this would mean 291% causualty rate for these units (which would include the Machine gunner).

    291% casualties/11months=317% casualties/year

    or 6.1% Casualties per week. Your probabilites of being a non-casualty:

    1 week= 93.9%

    2 weeks=88.2%

    3 weeks=82 %

    4 weeks=76.7%

    8 weeks=58.9%

    12 weeks= 47%

    16 weeks = 36.5%

    11 months = 5.4%

    Not quite 15 minutes, but still not great odds. Also, it should be noted that by far most of the casualties were clustered in June, July, November, December, and January, so for those months the casualty rates would be higher.

  13. hi Yank:

    If you think your son might be interested, E-mail me. To be honest, we do limit Ben's CM as we would prefer him to be outside running around. Still, I was thinking a turn a night by E-mail would be kind of fun for him and he could have his first cyber friend.

    E-mail me if interested.

×
×
  • Create New...